Yeah, that is true. Obviously if the shorter chain is to actually succeed it needs some hashing power that won't make the block interval too large like a day or more...

There is a bit to unpack here.

1. Transactions are replayable between RDTS and Bitcoin. Any transactions sent on either are also eligible to the other chaintip *unless* they spent UTXOs that only exist on one chaintip.
2. Nodes that run RDTS will reject blocks that don’t signal for RDTS activation. Currently, there have been zero blocks signaling readiness in this and the past difficulty period. They got 3 blocks in a difficulty period once at the peak which corresponds to about 0.15% hashrate adoption. Should the current hashrate adoption be maintained, RDTS nodes will simply get stuck below the height of the first block that doesn’t signal during the mandatory signaling period. They would still  see the unconfirmed transactions paying them, just have no information of what actually got confirmed.

Murch

What they are saying is only true if the RDTS fork eventually gets and maintains more hash rate than the non RDTS hashrate.

This is not exactly true. If the minority nodes are the actual economic actors, they simply won't accept coins from the other chain, even if it is longer. This will be the case if the nodes on the chain without bip110 don't use bitcoin as money.

bitcoin

Knots new release v29.3 includes bip 110 RDTS

Scoresby

> What they are saying is only true if the RDTS fork eventually gets and maintains more hash rate than the non RDTS hashrate.

This is not exactly true. If the minority nodes are the actual economic actors, they simply won't accept coins from the other chain, even if it is longer. This will be the case if the nodes on the chain without bip110 don't use bitcoin as money.